Bitcointalk Escrows - Trade Safely!

[Oilacris]

This is a question to other escrows, regarding the risks of being escrow while an intentional fork is happening.

What are your thoughts about?

Use Core.  Don't intermingle your coins with coins held in escrow.

That is the determination of someone who believes firmly in core. Though there is the possibility that miners chose to support a bitcoin client that creates 2 mb blocks. Which could turn into a mess when you still run core and suddenly your coins become worthless because a fork wins the majority and the old chains coins lose their value.

I'm really not ready to take such a risk. I mean it would be my error, at least if the users are not fully aware of me using a certain chain, and in worst case i had to refund a lot of bitcoins.

If you don't move the coin(s) during the fork, you will not lose nothing ...

You might double your coins after the fork. You can send one coins to the receiver and hold the other one.

[1715545125]

1715545125

[kotwica666]

This is a question to other escrows, regarding the risks of being escrow while an intentional fork is happening.
What are your thoughts about?

Use Core.  Don't intermingle your coins with coins held in escrow.

That is the determination of someone who believes firmly in core. Though there is the possibility that miners chose to support a bitcoin client that creates 2 mb blocks. Which could turn into a mess when you still run core and suddenly your coins become worthless because a fork wins the majority and the old chains coins lose their value.
I'm really not ready to take such a risk. I mean it would be my error, at least if the users are not fully aware of me using a certain chain, and in worst case i had to refund a lot of bitcoins.

If you don't move the coin(s) during the fork, you will not lose nothing ...

You might double your coins after the fork. You can send one coins to the receiver and hold the other one.

I see that is growing here little scammer.
Discussion is about, it that did not happen.

[Dabs]

This is a question to other escrows, regarding the risks of being escrow while an intentional fork is happening.

What are your thoughts about?

Use Core.  Don't intermingle your coins with coins held in escrow.

I use Core too.

As far as forks, if the coins to be held in escrow are not double spent (and you wait for confirmations), they will be in the escrow address, regardless of fork.

Remember that forks include all or most transactions. One chain may be longer than the other, but both will have your transaction of concern, that is, at the escrow address.

You could also wait out the event, it shouldn't last long.

Core is core. Everything else is simply another coin. Core will adapt if it needs to. If.

[mexxer-2]

~snip~

Anyone can see you bought this account, just because you have a hero member to play with doesn't automatically trusted enough to be an escrow.

January 11, 2016, 08:40:13 PM - Billyboy402 - password changed
January 11, 2016, 08:37:26 PM - Billyboy402 - password changed

Edit: If I had to take a wild guess, I'd say you are Operatr

[betterangels]

There's trusted escrows in the forum, like bitpop, ognasty, sebastianju, etc
Don't risk your btc

[mexxer-2]

1. I'm not Operatr.
2. Yeah i changed my password two times in one day.
3. I have a limit of 0.05 BTC

*Cough* Yup, you improved your english in a few months with a obvious gap. *cough* . But well, if you explicitly mention that you have the max limit of 0.05 BTC  I have no problem with you. But until then you shouldn't be listed on the list, not that marco will anyway

[Timelord2067]

There's trusted escrows in the forum, like bitpop, ognasty, sebastianju, etc
Don't risk your btc

Bitpop pulled out on the tenth of this month - here... https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=855778.msg13835292#msg13835292

[BTCBinary]

I have used the bitcointalk forum escrow services and it works quite well. besides, you can find trusted escrow services with absolutely no fees.

[Blazed]

I have used the bitcointalk forum escrow services and it works quite well. besides, you can find trusted escrow services with absolutely no fees.

That mentality is why the escrows are stopping their services.

[Quickseller]

This is a question to other escrows, regarding the risks of being escrow while an intentional fork is happening.

What are your thoughts about?

Use Core.  Don't intermingle your coins with coins held in escrow.

That is the determination of someone who believes firmly in core. Though there is the possibility that miners chose to support a bitcoin client that creates 2 mb blocks. Which could turn into a mess when you still run core and suddenly your coins become worthless because a fork wins the majority and the old chains coins lose their value.

I'm really not ready to take such a risk. I mean it would be my error, at least if the users are not fully aware of me using a certain chain, and in worst case i had to refund a lot of bitcoins.

If you don't move the coin(s) during the fork, you will not lose nothing ...

Yes, that is for sure. But iam an escrow so i meet similar problems an exchange would meet on a much larger base. As long as i don't want to stop my escrow service once a fork started and only resume it once one chain completely lost, i would need to find a solution to still be able to act as an escrow while avoiding the risks of a forking blockchain.

You will need to have the trading partners who you are escrowing for decide if they wish to deal in classic-BTC or core-BTC (or both -- a tx will need to be confirmed on both blockchains before funds are to be considered to be "held" in escrow). This will allow your trading partners to take the risk that the branch the are dealing with will fail. Your only risk in this case would be the expected fees you would receive from a transaction that is on a failing branch of a fork.

You would probably want to utilize a fully validating node/client for both core and classic and to not trust what you see on any block explorer though.

[bitpop]

I have used the bitcointalk forum escrow services and it works quite well. besides, you can find trusted escrow services with absolutely no fees.

That mentality is why the escrows are stopping their services.

Kind of, most people just ignored my .001 fee. Maybe because I said free, I didn't enforce it anyway. I did it for the community. But lately it's all account selling (my theory is govt agents https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/43x8s1/undercover_agents_are_infiltrating_bitcointalk_to/) and carded gift cards. I don't judge. But I originally wanted to do real commerce like services and computer parts. Those stopped a while ago.

[abyrnes81]

Bitpop you were one of the must trusted escrow of the forum , very sad.

[SebastianJu]

This is a question to other escrows, regarding the risks of being escrow while an intentional fork is happening.

What are your thoughts about?

Use Core.  Don't intermingle your coins with coins held in escrow.

That is the determination of someone who believes firmly in core. Though there is the possibility that miners chose to support a bitcoin client that creates 2 mb blocks. Which could turn into a mess when you still run core and suddenly your coins become worthless because a fork wins the majority and the old chains coins lose their value.

I'm really not ready to take such a risk. I mean it would be my error, at least if the users are not fully aware of me using a certain chain, and in worst case i had to refund a lot of bitcoins.

If you don't move the coin(s) during the fork, you will not lose nothing ...

Yes, that is for sure. But iam an escrow so i meet similar problems an exchange would meet on a much larger base. As long as i don't want to stop my escrow service once a fork started and only resume it once one chain completely lost, i would need to find a solution to still be able to act as an escrow while avoiding the risks of a forking blockchain.

You will need to have the trading partners who you are escrowing for decide if they wish to deal in classic-BTC or core-BTC (or both -- a tx will need to be confirmed on both blockchains before funds are to be considered to be "held" in escrow). This will allow your trading partners to take the risk that the branch the are dealing with will fail. Your only risk in this case would be the expected fees you would receive from a transaction that is on a failing branch of a fork.

You would probably want to utilize a fully validating node/client for both core and classic and to not trust what you see on any block explorer though.

I think you are right on the last paragraph. But why do you say that a tx needs to be confirmed on both blockchains when traders deceided on one chain?

I think the safest way would be to make payment on both chains the standard. Obviously many will not want to do that so traders might to negotiate sometimes what coin to take.

Well, a tip on the wrong chain would be unfortunate for sure. Though it is completely open yet if a trading of some kind will be allowed on exchanges... one chain against the other. Well, if not that, some members will specialize on exchanging such things anyway in the service section.

[SebastianJu]

I have used the bitcointalk forum escrow services and it works quite well. besides, you can find trusted escrow services with absolutely no fees.

That mentality is why the escrows are stopping their services.

Kind of, most people just ignored my .001 fee. Maybe because I said free, I didn't enforce it anyway. I did it for the community. But lately it's all account selling (my theory is govt agents https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/43x8s1/undercover_agents_are_infiltrating_bitcointalk_to/) and carded gift cards. I don't judge. But I originally wanted to do real commerce like services and computer parts. Those stopped a while ago.

Unfortunately that's true. Rarely miner deals. Mostly accounts, digital goods and sometimes consumer goods.

Generally i have the impression that trading is less then before. Instead practically worthless objects are traded in masses.

[Quickseller]

This is a question to other escrows, regarding the risks of being escrow while an intentional fork is happening.

What are your thoughts about?

Use Core.  Don't intermingle your coins with coins held in escrow.

That is the determination of someone who believes firmly in core. Though there is the possibility that miners chose to support a bitcoin client that creates 2 mb blocks. Which could turn into a mess when you still run core and suddenly your coins become worthless because a fork wins the majority and the old chains coins lose their value.

I'm really not ready to take such a risk. I mean it would be my error, at least if the users are not fully aware of me using a certain chain, and in worst case i had to refund a lot of bitcoins.

If you don't move the coin(s) during the fork, you will not lose nothing ...

Yes, that is for sure. But iam an escrow so i meet similar problems an exchange would meet on a much larger base. As long as i don't want to stop my escrow service once a fork started and only resume it once one chain completely lost, i would need to find a solution to still be able to act as an escrow while avoiding the risks of a forking blockchain.

You will need to have the trading partners who you are escrowing for decide if they wish to deal in classic-BTC or core-BTC (or both -- a tx will need to be confirmed on both blockchains before funds are to be considered to be "held" in escrow). This will allow your trading partners to take the risk that the branch the are dealing with will fail. Your only risk in this case would be the expected fees you would receive from a transaction that is on a failing branch of a fork.

You would probably want to utilize a fully validating node/client for both core and classic and to not trust what you see on any block explorer though.

I think you are right on the last paragraph. But why do you say that a tx needs to be confirmed on both blockchains when traders deceided on one chain?

I think the safest way would be to make payment on both chains the standard. Obviously many will not want to do that so traders might to negotiate sometimes what coin to take.

Well, a tip on the wrong chain would be unfortunate for sure. Though it is completely open yet if a trading of some kind will be allowed on exchanges... one chain against the other. Well, if not that, some members will specialize on exchanging such things anyway in the service section.

A tx will need to be confirmed on both chains if the parties want both core-btc and classic-btc to be transferred to them upon the release of escrow.

I don't think it would be realistic for a transaction to get confirmed on both chains. If for example, classic were to have 75% of the mining capacity then core would only have the capacity of 25% of what it did pre-fork, which means there will be a major backlog of transactions waiting to get confirmed on blocks that will only be "found" at a quarter of the rate they normally are.

I am sure that some people will probably temporarily trade between core and classic coins, however I don't expect a market to last very long, and the value of the coins on the 'loosing' chain will likely be near zero after a few days/weeks.

[SebastianJu]

A tx will need to be confirmed on both chains if the parties want both core-btc and classic-btc to be transferred to them upon the release of escrow.

Ah ok. Only was wondering because you mentioned that traders would decide on one chain. But yes, both chains would be the best outcome.

I don't think it would be realistic for a transaction to get confirmed on both chains. If for example, classic were to have 75% of the mining capacity then core would only have the capacity of 25% of what it did pre-fork, which means there will be a major backlog of transactions waiting to get confirmed on blocks that will only be "found" at a quarter of the rate they normally are.

Though that might only stay that way until next diff update. And the transactions will become less and less because coins moving from certain addresses are not existent there, so many transactions will be not valid.

I am sure that some people will probably temporarily trade between core and classic coins, however I don't expect a market to last very long, and the value of the coins on the 'loosing' chain will likely be near zero after a few days/weeks.

I think so too. I await the losing coin to collaps pretty fast. Though both chain's bitcoins would lose alot of value anyway upfront. Just from people going out to watch what is happening.

[Mickeyb]

Removing Blazr should be considered, he has not been active since Nov 2015. And also putting an asterisk over BitcoinDream and PsychoticBoy, both seem iactive since quite some time.

[Timelord2067]

Removing Blazr should be considered, he has not been active since Nov 2015. And also putting an asterisk over BitcoinDream and PsychoticBoy, both seem iactive since quite some time.

Could be a good vacation he is on - No?

[Mickeyb]

Removing Blazr should be considered, he has not been active since Nov 2015. And also putting an asterisk over BitcoinDream and PsychoticBoy, both seem iactive since quite some time.

Could be a good vacation he is on - No?

Could be, but what good is an escrow if he's not active? Seems the same with Anon136

[aleandromagno]

Removing Blazr should be considered, he has not been active since Nov 2015. And also putting an asterisk over BitcoinDream and PsychoticBoy, both seem iactive since quite some time.

Could be a good vacation he is on - No?

Let us hope that no similar "holiday" as escrow.ms ..